An
Interview with Producers Felicia Day and Justin Kownacki
The
television industry is changing, and the current strike by the Writers
Guild of America reflects those changes. The primary issues are different
than the last walk-out in 1988, which revolved around residuals from
hour-long shows, as the 2007 version is not about payment for traditional
television but rather compensation for shows downloaded from, as well
as video produced exclusively for, the Internet. The outcome of this
strike will also have ripple effects far removed from the members of
the Writers Guild or even the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television
Producers, the writers’ adversary, as independent online producers
both within and far distant from Hollywood will likewise be affected.
Felicia Day and Justin Kownacki are two such online entrepreneurs, as
they each currently produce their own webseries, namely The
Guild and Something
to Be Desired (STBD).
They also represent the extreme spectrum of independent Internet production:
Day is a Los Angeles-based actress and member of the Screen Actors Guild
whose credentials include Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Monk.
Kownacki, on the other hand, is a film school graduate and New Media
consultant residing in Pittsburgh. Despite these insider/outsider and
geographical disparages, both were driven to the World of the Web for
the same fundamental reason—they had a story to tell.
When the television networks passed on a pilot written by Day about
a group of online gamers, she filmed it herself and posted it on the
likes of YouTube (The Guild). Kownacki, meanwhile, turned a
script he wrote—revolving
around a group of twentysomethings working at a fictitious Pittsburgh
radio station—into
smaller slices and posted them on the Internet instead of making a short
film (STBD). Although on opposite ends of the country, they
each now find themselves following the writers strike with a potential
stake in the outcome, as well as “rooting” for the same
side (the WGA) in
the ongoing labor dispute.
“I believe that online video needs to evolve to satisfy a hunger
for more professional productions,” offers Day. “Who better
to provide that than people whose livelihood is to make entertainment?
In order to stand out from the flood of choices in the online video
realm, Internet sites are going to have to develop content that is more
polished, and better acted and written. That is going to come from the
people who are already good at doing their jobs: union professionals.”
Kownacki, meanwhile, has a more cautious viewpoint: “As with any
union-vs.-non-union issue, there will be pros and cons on both sides.
In general, yes, what’s good for the WGA would be good for the
long-term health of web content in general—because, if nothing
else, a favorable agreement will force studios to admit that there is
value in web content, and would therefore make it easier for web content
producers to be taken seriously/obtain potential production funding.
“The potential downside,” he continues, “is that any
legalities borne from this agreement could make the creation of new
web content more difficult due to additional hoops to jump through for
independent producers. However, as Hollywood has seen independent films
live healthily in their shadow for years, so too will web content proliferate
regardless of legal hurdles—especially because of the increasingly
democratized methods of distribution that allow the ingenious to outwit
the behemoths of Traditional Distribution.”
In recent months the industry has already witnessed an example of such
“outwitting” in the form of another original webseries,
quarterlife, created and produced by television veterans Marshall
Herskovitz and Edward Zwick (thirtysomething, My So Called
Life). The series was launched in November with much fanfare and
publicity (the fact that the writers strike, with its central issues
of web-produced content, began at approximately the same time only fueled
such flames) as media outlets who had never acknowledged a webseries
before suddenly reported on this “innovative” storytelling
device.
But although quarterlife helped garner attention to the webseries
concept, both Day and Kownacki did not share in the hoopla the series
attracted. “Personally, I hate to see those slick productions
take the limelight from the real Internet pioneers,” says Day,
while Kownacki adds, “It’s hard for me to develop an opinion
about quarterlife because I look at it from an ‘insider’s
outsider’ point of view—meaning, I’ve been working
with web media for so long, I’m always amused when someone new
arrives at the party with ‘all the answers.’”
In many ways quarterlife was more a well-placed shot at those
“behemoths of Traditional Distribution,” to use Kownacki’s
phrase, than a venture into a new realm of storytelling production.
On November 7, 2007, the Los Angeles Times ran an op/ed piece
written by Herskovitz decrying the current monopoly that media giants
are exerting over the television industry. In Herskovitz’s view,
it began in 1995 with the repeal of the long-standing “finsyn”
(short for “financial interest and syndication”) rules which
had prevented television networks from owning the programs they broadcasted.
The aftereffects resulted in independent production companies fading
into obscurity and an unprecedented level of network involvement in
all creative aspects of a series.
“Zwick and I have joined (the) migration to the Internet,”
Herskovitz went on to write, referring to quarterlife. “To
be sure, there’s every possibility this series will end up on
television after it’s established on the Internet, but only if
we still own it and control it creatively, which would make it unique
in today’s landscape.”
The fact that Herskovitz and Zwick have since reached an agreement with
NBC to air quarterlife raises speculation that their true intentions
were to produce a traditional television series, sans network interference,
from the very start, as well as prove that there was still room for
independents in an increasingly consolidated Hollywood. Regardless of
such ulterior motives, however, the publicity surrounding quarterlife
is still seen by both Day and Kownacki as beneficial for the webseries
medium in general. “The success of web content created by the
studios, or by people with insider connections,” contends Kownacki,
“can have a positive impact on actual independent producers (like
myself), because it will force traditional media’s eyes to cover
the web as a legitimate news source.”
“Have you seen how much press quarterlife has gotten
in mainstream media?” Day adds. “They had massive PR people
involved in that, I’m sure. Getting newspapers and other traditional
media to look at the ‘new frontier’ is hard, but when they
find that readers are interested in online content, they will explore
more of it in their articles. Then it will trickle down to us indie
people hopefully as more people venture onto the web for entertainment.”
Although no one is currently making any real money off of Internet video,
the general belief is that at some point somebody will indeed figure
out a way to do so. Even the WGA argues as much, and are simply trying
to establish their percentage of that revenue now so as not to be locked
out in the future. Both Day and Kownacki are likewise optimistic in
regards to online video content emerging as a revenue-generator, although
both believe that some fundamental social and technological changes
need to occur first.
“I think there will be a complete merging of TV and online in
the next 5-10 years,” Day says. “Call me crazy, but there’s
a tipping point for all this. Remember when we bought CDs and listened
to music that way? Five years can make a huge difference in technology.
A lot of people I know torrent TV illegally now anyway, and with stuff
like Hulu out there, how can it not merge? And where the eyes are, there
will be ads, and ads equal dollars.”
Kownacki has a similar viewpoint, although he takes it a few steps further.
“The eventuality of web video becoming a profitable venture in
and of itself is inevitable,” he states. “Saying it’s
impossible is like claiming no one will ever want to pay money for video
content—it’s simply untrue, as film and TV prove daily.”
He goes on to list three key elements that will facilitate that eventuality:
the continued consolidation of delivery mediums (television, computers
and cell phones); web aggregators making it easier
for viewers to find quality video content;
and online creators producing webseries more suitable for the masses.
“The shows we’re naturally predisposed to creating now,”
Kownacki explains, “are not necessarily
the shows that will bring in the mainstream audiences that are necessary
to monetize the medium broadly, which then allows for the sponsorship
of niche-driven content as a value-added proposition.”
As for the future, both Day and Kownacki agree that webseries production
will continue to expand as audience-levels rise and more independent
creators take the online plunge. “I think there will be an increasing
tolerance for longer web shows,” Day says, “and a growth
in more professionally-made content, but the great thing about the Internet
is that there’s room for filmmakers from all walks of life to
get their stuff seen on the Internet. After all, everything is just
one URL away.”
“I’m continually shocked that more people don’t realize
they can create their own ongoing ‘TV show’ online for minimal
budgets,” Kownacki muses. “Of course, having done it for
five years now, I realize it's a lot more difficult than it might initially
seem—which is why STBD remains something of an island
unto itself.” He then adds, “But probably not for long...”
From East
Coast to West, and everywhere in between, the purveyors of independent
online video no doubt agree with such an assessment as well.
December
24, 2007
